Silverchemist

Hey there, Silverchemist. Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian and decide to stay! Here are a few good links for newcomers (or "oldcomers" for reference):

By the way, you should sign and date your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Three tildes (~~~) produces just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

Great, just what we need around this place... more chemistry geeks. :) Cheers. --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 19:12, 2 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your contributions! They are much appreciated! However, if possible can you please reference work that you add to the article? It's just that if we encourage new additions or clean-ups to use references, then when it comes to expansion it is a lot easier to add information without having to do lots of work. If you require help with the reference system that's used on the article, please consult this page and this one too!. Thanks very much! ♥♥ ΜÏΠЄSΓRΘΠ€ ♥♥ ^{slurp me!} 22:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I meant book references; "Hydrocarbon Chemistry", "The properties of hydrocarbons" and other organic chemistry books would be good places to start as they're quite detailed in their approaches to the topic. For the moment, don't worry about the internal links-- quite a lot of the chemistry articles on here are rough around the edges or incomplete, so if you see anything that you can contribute to, add it in by all means, but try to add a book + page reference alongside it.

The reason why we tend to do it is, obviously for verifiability, but also so when the article expands, we can choose which bits are suitable and which aren't and obviousy so we keep small minded intermediaries, like Encyclopedia Britannica at bay with regards to press and accuracy on the whole. ♥♥ ΜÏΠЄSΓRΘΠ€ ♥♥ ^{slurp me!} 08:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your adds to the Polyurethane article. It needs a ton (tonne) of work. Best Regards. P Cottontail 03:57, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Re your your recent PU edits - well done. Cheers! Sandcherry (talk) 05:18, 11 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading Image:Molded polyurethane foam.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

 

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 05:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Apart from a mention that engineers from the base used a beach for equipment storage and that one of the people mentioned in this section was stationed on the base, there is no connection of this section to the main article. This is about a private land dispute that occurred over 50 years ago. Even though storage space may be virtually unlimited, this is not a justifictation for the length and level of detail in this section. For example: What value is there in knowing the size of the camping lots, or where the flower shop and tailor shop were located? This section should be removed. Silverchemist 18:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your note, this was orignally a unpublished manuscript written in a more persanlable manner trying to bring in personal stories and local events that people on the base/town would be interested in knowing. I will endeavour to work on it again.I just got back from Stephenville where I gave a photo show and talk on the base and the Long Gull Pond etc and it was well received WayneRay 22:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)WayneRayReply

Silverchemist --

No problem; I was happy to give you that little bit of support on the Castor oil page. It strikes me as a bit underhanded to materially change a comment to remove a point that's been responded to. It puts the responder in a false light. I should have asked him to do it, though; it was bad form for me to edit his comment myself. Terry Carroll 21:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Could you please take a look at the section Medicinal use of castor oil and edit as appropriate? See my comments on the talk page. -- Terry Carroll 16:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Quite frankly, 'dominion' does not need to be capitalised in every instance. All nouns were formally capitalized in British legislative style: e.g., "One Dominion under the Name of Canada." However, you fail to understand that capitalisation should shift with context (so, of course it has a specific meaning in the article): e.g., 'dominion' in usual contemporary parlance, yet 'Dominion of Newfoundland', 'Dominion forces'. As has been demonstrated, numerous dictionaries do not indicate capitalisation in some instances; this has also been discussed at the 'dominion' article before with no clear consensus, and I see no consensus regarding this. Anyhow, there are far more things wrong with that article than not and I have better things to do than to quibble over minutiae. All the power to you. Quizimodo 14:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi; I wasn't sure at first to which area your coordinates were pointing out and I wanted to ensure the location is the exact site of the fort. All of the information I could gain on the subject noted the extremity of the point of land as the location of Fort Amherst see NL Heritage website. Then I remembered that there is a plaque in the cove which made a reference to what was established there, for the life of me I can't remember what it said.

I know what you mean by the title coordinates apply extra search criteria and causes an error. I find that when selecting the coordinate and it takes you to the Map Sources/GeoHack page I either select the Satellite hot-link or the Hybrid hot-link and zoom in appropriately. I also find the Google Earth "kml" file very convenient to take you directly to the location using Google Earth. --HJKeats 11:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well, it's crude but a‎ new page has been established. Take a look. I welcome changes and additions. FWIW Bzuk 02:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC).Reply

Hi, I've seen your name popping up in various places in my watchlist recently. I just wanted to thank you for your contributions. A steady stream of referenced content to expand our chemistry articles is very helpful, and we at WP:CHEMS and WP:CHEM certainly appreciate it. Keep up the good work! Walkerma 06:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading Image:Polyester1.PNG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Polyester.PNG. The copy called Image:Polyester.PNG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 01:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

On 26 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bleaching of wood pulp, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 01:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Silverchemist: How was the CPI conference? P Cottontail 13:20, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Is there something in particular that you want cleaned up in this article? I have just started writing it and I find the clean up tag a bit annoying. Additions yes, but clean up? Silverchemist 03:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Now the article looks great. At the time I tagged it it may have needed a bit of work, but it looks fine now. Sorry about how long it took to get back to you. -jj137 ^T/_C 19:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

No problem. Glad to hear you think it looks okay now. I still have some material to add. Silverchemist 19:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oh sure- very seldom do you ever see a new article look that nice. It shows you must have put a lot of work, effort, and time into it. (That's probably something I should try harder at in the future). Best of luck with it. -jj137 ^T/_C 20:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

On 6 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article natural oil polyols , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 17:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

When you add a prod to an article, use the {{subst:prod}} template. That allows the dates to be filled in properly so it's easy to tell when the prods were added. Thanks! --UsaSatsui 14:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Greetings. Would you have time to check this? - Skysmith 07:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Silverchemist: I've added a bit on chain extenders/cross linkers to the Polyurethane article. I'd like to recommend to the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Chemicals list this be reviewed and bumped up to B-class. What do you think? Also, is the PU talk page on your watch list? If you prefer, I can post over there regarding the article. Best Regards, P Cottontail 23:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC) P.S. Love the article on the World's Fastest Prop Aircraft. I'd be driving P-38's in another cost-is-no-object life!Reply

On 17 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sulfite process, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 15:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

On 20 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article lignosulfonates, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 15:58, 20 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

I'm interested in the reference that you added to the Red Rain article, but can't immediately locate anything by DiGregorio on the Analytical Chemistry site, and Cornell's site comes up with 404s when I search for Brenna.

BTW, I'm firmly not in the 'extraterrestrials' camp; just rather surprised that anyone managed to get hold of a sample. Godfrey Louis and Martin Wainwright both seemed more than a little reluctant to share anything, including data.

I'd be interested if you have come across any trace of HPLC or GC-MS analyses of the raindust. It's surprising that no one seems to have done either of these.

Best Regards,Davy p 19:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I found the article using ACS SciFinder, a subscription service (which I can't access right now). If I put a block of text into Google it gives one good hit,[1] but won't display the result. PubMed still has a reference to the article [2], but again it requires a subscription to see tha article. The article itself is nore of a news article rather than a scientific paper in that it doesn't give any experimental conditions or numerical data. It seems to me that it should be reasonably easy to identify the material if a good analytical chemist were to get involved. DCP, XRF or anynumber of techniques would be useful. Silverchemist 20:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Can you point me to the place in the reference [3] for Fossil fuel where it supports the statement "It was estimated that in 2005 86% of human-produced energy came from burning fossil fuels"? I saw your change Diff but I am not finding what you are talking about. Jeepday (talk) 03:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

• Got it thanks :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepday (talk • contribs) 01:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

On 25 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bertram Fraser-Reid, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Rudget _talk 18:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

I appreciated your input. Could you please when time allows write a paragraph that summarizes the points Morris makes about Canada's military contributions and post confederation autonomy? It would be a great help. The article is somewhat silent on this issue. It would help move the article forward. --soulscanner (talk) 17:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've reported this user's uncivil behaviour at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. As you're involved in the discussion at Talk:Dominion, you may wish to comment.--Gazzster (talk) 01:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You are invited to a discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Quizimodo.--Gazzster (talk) 23:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Would you be interested in co-certifying?--Gazzster (talk) 02:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Just a heads-up that I moved the discussion to Talk:Recycling#Merge of Recycling criticisms, where I ought to have started it originally. --jwanders^Talk 08:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

On 11 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Western Brook Pond Fjord , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Victuallers (talk) 21:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

 

Thank you for uploading Image:Osprey in flight.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 21:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I thought I had specified the copyright status of thius image when I uploaded it. It is fixed now Silverchemist (talk) 22:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I noted your correction and explanation re the [two different] Pere Marquette trails. My thanks for explaining that and clearing it up. Xenophon777 (talk) 16:08, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Great Stuff was not deleted by me, it was deleted by Andrew c (talk · contribs). And deletions don't show up in Special:Contributions, they show up in Special:Log/delete. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I assessed Western Brook Pond a stub because the main body of the text could have sections to make it more reader-friendly, not just the reference section. Seriously, I felt Western Brook Pond was a borderline high stub / weak start, but high stub isn't one of the assessment levels you can enter into the lakes template. I gave stub ratings to many articles because they lacked references (includes proper formatting, footnotes, citation templates), infoboxes, photos, sectioning (one big block of text is reader-unfriendly, very short sections that contain one or two sentences should be merged), needed copyediting / cleanup, comprised of a massive image gallery, and / or had a stub template on the bottom. Yes, I set a high bar for articles, but if you strongly disagree with the initial ratings, go ahead and reassess it yourself and / or improve the article. The ratings are not set in stone. If there are other particular assessments that you don't agree with, feel free to bring it up. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Tiesto - Above and Beyond} 04:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about the tag, we tried to eliminate as many false-positives as possible, but we are only human. If any thing like this occurs on any other article, please let us know ASAP.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 00:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Did you give up on this? I didn't specify a specific time limit but as its been over a week let's say that the changes need to be substantially complete by 23rd July. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 17:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

On 12 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Newfoundland Royal Naval Reserve, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 05:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Dear Silverchemist, thank you VERY much for reporting the threat you found to ANI. I have reported this information to the town's police and they are looking into it. I wanted to personally thank you. Bstone (talk) 19:01, 16 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello there. I saw your note on the talk page, and the modifications to the lead paragraph, which is awesome. I was a bit anxious to try to get an article of SK to GA, and of all the "B" class articles, this was the best, which is not so very good. So after the Geo of SK review, I have practised editing, and have learnt a little bit more over the last year. I have added a new Physical geography section which supports your lead paragraph facts and beefed up the old Water section, now titled Hydrography. I will keep puttering modeling after the GA articles Geography of Newfoundland and Labrador and Geography of South Dakota as well as the FA article Geography of Ireland, which would be a better comparison than other ... I am sad to say ... not as good B SK articles. If you are willing to also edit the article, it would be very wonderful. I will also go through and check the references and convert them all to citation templates for consistency, one of the old GA review points. Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 03:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello there..I am spreading myself thin. I will return. There is a silly contest going, and I should stop doing it for a bit. But thought I would see how it worked initially and the DYK have silly time limits. I also have only a few days left in a GA review on another article then they will decide on it. But I really would like to see Geo of SK improve as well, and see you have been busy!!! I am also a teeny sick so my GA on hold is hard to do with sinuses all stuffy, but I will be better soon, steaming tonite. But I soon will have another day off work, and will devote more time there to SK Geo as well. Sorry for the lapse, as it is nice to go at an article when there are a few on it. Thank you again for your efforts on it!!! I am not leaving you in the lurch.... Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 05:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello I worked a little bit on the Economy section but I am not finished yet. It really was too big for just this article, and the geography article really has too many tables. (IMHO) Some other sections should be probably smooshed off into see main article and summarised into Geography of SK... which can also be another thingie to do. I removed the additional info section, and linked to the same facts in an external link, and placed the remaining few on the talk page. But today, will diverge again, and come back next I have time off work. Kind Regards, and BTW I notice above you contributed to Geo of Newfoundland etc. Awesome!!! and great job!!! wow Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 02:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello there. I'm back. Wrote an article about Geology of Saskatchewan, tried to summarise it's content into a lead paragraph, and drop the lead into Geography of Saskatchewan.. Similarly wrote an article about the Flora of Saskatchewan, again tried to encapsulate its content into a lead, and again drop the flora lead paragraph into Geography of Saskatchewan as a section. ...Would still like to do that for Fauna as well. Didn't go back to the main Economy of Saskatchewan article yet, but would like to make it less date reliant so it does not staledate so fast... but maybe the economy is just like that. Could you please to give these two articles/sections a fresh eye based on your copy editing experiences.SriMesh | talk 02:08, 26 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello Silverchemist,

I'm soliciting objective opinions on a linking issue.

Please visit my talk page, section "Review of links" as a starting point.

Thank you in advance.

Confectus (talk) 11:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I started WP:PHARM:CAT in hopes of providing better guidance regarding the categorization of pharmacology articles. If available, I have posted an updated draft at WT:PHARM:CAT, and would appreciate your feedback. kilbad (talk) 23:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I use a resin which produces density of around 300g/l which is a rigid foam. I'd like to know what sort of resin I would need in order to create a seat mould like the one shown in the polyurethane section of wiki. Any help would be appreciated. N80krr (talk) 17:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

It depends if you want to use TDI or MDI as the isocyanate. Unless you are familar with the safety precautions required for handling TDI, I would strongly suggest using MDI, perhaps even an MDI propolymer. A typical formulation would contain 85-90 parts polyol (4000 to 6000 mw triol), 2.5 to 4 % water, up to 2% diethanolamine, and smaller amounts of amine catalysts and silicone surfactants. Many chemical companies sell fully formulated resins and isocyanates to make flexible foam. If you want still more detail contact me by email at silverchemist@gmail.com. Silverchemist (talk) 03:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described here). If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 20:47, 5 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello SC-- I thought you might have some interest in the subject of this article. Feel free to add to it, if you choose. And if you ever get a chance to photograph the ship in her resting place at Embree, or her remains elsewhere, it would be appreciated. Regards, Kablammo (talk) 20:00, 22 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your kind note. I wonder if the gun you mentioned may be this one. While the article does not identify the gun as having come from the ship, I have come across another source that suggests some of her guns were landed and used for harbour defence. I hope to use a couple of the images I link at the article's talk page.

Photographs of a gun, her anchor, and the hull would be useful, but the latter two are in the Lewisporte area. And should there be a usable photograph in your own family archives, it could give a human touch. Regards, Kablammo (talk) 12:02, 24 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have come into possession of a scholarly article on the ship and NRNR (I just added the link to the ship article). I see that you do not have e-mail enabled; if you wish to enable it (perhaps a throwaway account, if you do not otherwise want to have it) I will send you a copy. Regards, Kablammo (talk) 23:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your edits and corrections on Red rains in Kerala. It is a pleasure to work with an editor like you. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 20:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

P.S: Some Indian physicists just won't let it go: Red rain cell research: A new perspective for interplanetary transfer of life Not peer-reviewed, and presented during an European congress in 2009. BatteryIncluded (talk) 01:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

When I said 'I have the training' I meant I am a molecular biologist, however, I have not been involved in the Red rain pandemonium in any professional manner. I do have a personal interest in astrobiology as I was involved with a related microbiology project which I could tell you in a private email. I will check the paper you sent me, but I rather don't feed the fringe theory section any further. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 02:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the link to their 2008 paper. I see they use plenty of weasel words which ultimately produced an intellectually dishonest pseudo-scientific paper. No wonder why they can't produce a peer-reviewed article. It really makes me wonder their motive to distort facts and their reluctance to grow the spores in algal medium. The fluoresence bit is interesting, however it is by no means an indication of exobiology; there are plenty of unicellular and complex organisms that fluoresce naturally and under controlled conditions. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I was wondering if you'd be interested to please freely express you opinion, based on the available scientific literature, in the merger proposal I started on Talk:Dark dune spots. Thank you,

BatteryIncluded (talk) 21:38, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

  Hello! Your submission of Reticulated foam at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Kieran (talk) 01:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

On October 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Reticulated foam, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 06:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

The organic chemistry definition is well done (at least to my eyes). Readers need to be presented with the way it is operationally.--Smokefoot (talk) 18:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Copyedit from the Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech talk page: "As to writing style, for a hoot, I took one paragraph from the article that I had exclusively written and submitted it to a writing style check. The analysis indicated that the style matched precisely that of: David Foster Wallace (February 21, 1962 – September 12, 2008) a professor at Pomona College in Claremont, California, noted as an American author of novels, essays and short stories. He was widely known for his 1996 novel Infinite Jest, which Time included in its All-Time 100 Greatest Novels list (covering the period 1923–2006). So, you can see that writing style can be entirely arbitrary and capricious. I did the same for some of the other notables on this page and got matches of writing style to "Ursula K. Le Guin", "Dan Brown", "Stephen King", "Kurt Vonnegut" and "James Joyce." Now, for the fun: match up: Silverchemist, Mark Sublette, BilCat, AussieLegend and Binksternet to their writing styles! FWiW, the matches are scrambled, guess your style. Bzuk (talk) 12:52, 18 July 2010 (UTC).Reply

On 8 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ryan Premises, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

On 20 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Landysh, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Landysh, a Russian vessel built with funding from Japan to decommission nuclear submarines, was requested by Japan to assist in the aftermath of the Fukushima I nuclear accidents? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

  A deletion discussion has just been created at Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures, which may involve one or more orphaned chemical structures, that has you user name in the upload history. Please feel free to add your comments.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. When you recently edited National Aboriginal Veterans Monument, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Calumet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Neat article! I think the photo is really nice too so I added it to the nomination with my DYK approval. PumpkinSky talk 03:25, 21 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

I added WP:Canada to the talk page. Can you other appropriate projects? I don't know what they'd be for this, but there is probably a veteran on military one or two.PumpkinSky talk 03:30, 21 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

On 23 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article National Aboriginal Veterans Monument, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the National Aboriginal Veterans Monument in Ottawa, Canada, depicts four animal spirit guides surrounding the human figures? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/National Aboriginal Veterans Monument.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I've just read your Bleaching of wood pulp article. It's a model of clarity, whereas the Bleach article seems (to this reader) to be a bit mixed up; it can't seem to make up its mind whether it's talking about "bleach" in its non-specialist meaning of just NaOCl, or as an overview of the bleaches available. In no way would I try to put an obligation to write something in another contributor's way, but if you did have some spare time, at some time in the future, it would be well spent there! All the best. --Old Moonraker (talk) 19:14, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Silverchemist. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/Sarnia/archive2.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 23:30, 23 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I suspect that you aren't aware of the background to my deletion of the material recently added to the chlorine dioxide‎ article. The IP has been making almost-identical changes to the Miracle Mineral Supplement article, and is clearly attempting to negate the well-sourced article material on the obvious dangers of using bleach as a 'cure' for AIDS, cancer, and who-knows-what else. There is a long history of such behaviour regarding the MMS article, and given that MMS is discussed in the chlorine dioxide article too, it isn't surprising that it has spead there. In any case, per WP:MEDRS, we shouldn't be using single primary sources for medical claims in articles, and I have accordingly reverted again. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:57, 8 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

My rewrite of the recently added material was carefully worded to avoid any medical claims. The reference is useful and is completely in line with OSHA PEL for chlorine dioxide in air. I added the OSHA citation, rewrote the section again. I have no liking for medical quackery, but this information is good regardless of the IP who initially put it in. Please do not revert.Silverchemist (talk) 14:56, 8 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alkene, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hydration (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 11 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

A section of the article Castor oil that you have participated in prior discussions of is the subject of a new discussion Talk:Castor_oil#Clarity_in_.22Intimidation....22_section. I thought you might be interested or have input. - - MrBill3 (talk) 14:34, 28 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Your upload of File:Conceptionbay northview.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:08, 20 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

• Another one of your uploads, File:Conceptionbay southview.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:09, 21 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply